SERIES: Intelligible > imaginable(believable) > reasonable > rational > justificationary > logical > calculable > tautological. 1) On can rely on intuitionism and start with reason in order to construct calculation, or one can start with logic explain calculation (transformation of inputs into outputs), and devolve calculation into increasingly incommensurable (deflated, inflated, conflated, fictionalized) categories, until we define the unintelligible. 2) We can start optimistically with an attempt at negotiation and therefore cooperation, leaving open one’s choice of preference, or we can start pessimistically with prosecution and therefore and therefore a threat, leaving decidability (Truth) as the only means of escape. 3) In the market and in philosophy we can choose, in law and the court we cannot, because if you cannot testify to it – which is what empiricism is reducible to – you cannot defend yourself from prosecution with it. So as I write natural law, I don’t negotiate, I prosecute.
Category: Law, Constitution, and Jurisprudence
-
We Win Either Way
You don’t understand. The reason to spend so much time on the philosophy, the law, the new constitution, its applications, the arguments, training others to conduct those arguments, is to prevent them from lying about our intentions and demands. There is nothing more profoundly moral than voluntary reciprocity. And if they use force to suppress it they invalidate their entire justification for governing. We’re going to win. We win either way. They will acquiesce or there will be nothing left to govern. Because all sides are armed, and committed.
-
We Win Either Way
You don’t understand. The reason to spend so much time on the philosophy, the law, the new constitution, its applications, the arguments, training others to conduct those arguments, is to prevent them from lying about our intentions and demands. There is nothing more profoundly moral than voluntary reciprocity. And if they use force to suppress it they invalidate their entire justification for governing. We’re going to win. We win either way. They will acquiesce or there will be nothing left to govern. Because all sides are armed, and committed.
-
WE WIN EITHER WAY You don’t understand. The reason to spend so much time on the
WE WIN EITHER WAY
You don’t understand. The reason to spend so much time on the philosophy, the law, the new constitution, its applications, the arguments, training others to conduct those arguments, is to prevent them from lying about our intentions and demands.
There is nothing more profoundly moral than voluntary reciprocity. And if they use force to suppress it they invalidate their entire justification for governing.
We’re going to win.
We win either way.
They will acquiesce or there will be nothing left to govern. Because all sides are armed, and committed.
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-04 17:24:00 UTC
-
So let me get this straight, if they try to prosecute the president for obstruct
So let me get this straight, if they try to prosecute the president for obstruction despite the fact that there was no crime, and nothing to obstruct, meaning he that he was honest, and the entire thing was a setup, then is that when the right wing burns dc to ashes?
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-02 20:34:21 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/991777939103600640
-
So let me get this straight, if they try to prosecute the president for obstruct
So let me get this straight, if they try to prosecute the president for obstruction despite the fact that there was no crime, and nothing to obstruct, meaning he that he was honest, and the entire thing was a setup, then is that when the right wing burns dc to ashes?
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-02 16:34:00 UTC
-
The Law Is the Only Master of Sovereign Men
—“One-against-one, the Spartans are as good as anyone in the world. But when they fight in a body, they are the best of all the world. For though they are free men, they are not entirely free. They accept Law as their master. And they respect this master more than your subjects respect you. Whatever he commands, they do. And his command never changes: It forbids them to flee in battle, whatever the number of their foes. He requires them to stand firm — to conquer or die.”—Damaratus to Xerxes.
-
The Law Is the Only Master of Sovereign Men
—“One-against-one, the Spartans are as good as anyone in the world. But when they fight in a body, they are the best of all the world. For though they are free men, they are not entirely free. They accept Law as their master. And they respect this master more than your subjects respect you. Whatever he commands, they do. And his command never changes: It forbids them to flee in battle, whatever the number of their foes. He requires them to stand firm — to conquer or die.”—Damaratus to Xerxes.
-
THE LAW IS THE ONLY MASTER OF SOVEREIGN MEN —“One-against-one, the Spartans ar
THE LAW IS THE ONLY MASTER OF SOVEREIGN MEN
—“One-against-one, the Spartans are as good as anyone in the world. But when they fight in a body, they are the best of all the world. For though they are free men, they are not entirely free. They accept Law as their master. And they respect this master more than your subjects respect you. Whatever he commands, they do. And his command never changes: It forbids them to flee in battle, whatever the number of their foes. He requires them to stand firm — to conquer or die.”—Damaratus to Xerxes.
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-01 18:33:00 UTC
-
“A man may not prosecute a woman, and a woman may not prosecute a man.”
“A man may not prosecute a woman, and a woman may not prosecute a man.”
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-30 23:12:30 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/991092961986449408